Perspective: Writer's art: I'm all right, you're alright

Some months ago, Vanity Fair gave a friendly review to Ian Falconer's third book about Olivia the Pig. The headline read, "The Pigs are Alright."

Very well, you writers, readers and copy editors. Were Olivia and her porcine buddies all right, or were they alright?

In its Stylebook, The Associated Press says heavily that "alright" is never acceptable. The New York Times agrees. The American Heritage Dictionary joins the parade: "Despite its use by a number of reputable authors, the spelling 'alright' has never been accepted as a standard variant." Oxford is unequivocal: "Although found widely, 'alright' remains nonstandard."

The Encarta dictionary asks rhetorically, "Is it 'all right' to use 'alright'"? The editors are equivocal. "It depends on your point of view. Some people think the one- word spelling is justified by the analogy of 'already' and 'altogether,' and that it is sometimes useful to be able to distinguish between 'all right' and 'alright' (just like 'altogether' and 'all together')."

Over at Merriam-Webster the editors say: "Since the early 20th century some critics have insisted 'alright' is wrong, but it has its defenders and its users. It is less frequent than 'all right' but remains in common use, esp. in journalistic and business publications."

If you were waiting for Judge Kilpatrick to render a verdict, you have not waited in vain. What should be done with "alright"? Throw the bum out! Whether it functions as adjective or adverb, "alright" has a lean and hungry look. It's a modifier from the dog pound.

A train of thought rumbles along. Last November the Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch carried a headline, "Toddler declared dead is revived awhile later." In a recent column, Richard Cohen recalled a time in the 1920s when a cult of violence became part of the German ethic. "After awhile," Cohen wrote, "Germans became inured." Awhile? What's your call on "a while" and "awhile"?

We have chased this one around the block before, and have yet to catch up with it. This is one general rule: Use two words after a preposition, one word after a verb. Thus, "She stayed for a while," but, "She left awhile ago." The trouble with that general rule is no one can remember it. George Philip Krapp, a commentator in the early 1900s, propounded another general rule: When "awhile" is an adverb, it's one word, e.g., "She stayed to chat awhile." When it's a noun phrase, two words, "Then she went outside for a while." No one can remember Krapp's rule, either.

This is Kilpatrick's general rule: Spell it any way you please -- one word, two words, the meaning is identical. The two-word version may infinitesimally slow the pace of your narrative. "She waited a while before she slugged him" seems to me a little more contemplative, a little less impulsive, than "She waited awhile before she slugged him." Probably my imagination.

Some paragraphs ago I sought the opinion of (two-word) copy editors. Hold on! Are these long-suffering angels better identified as (one-word) copyeditors? You have already surmised that authorities disagree. Indeed they do. Three of my everyday dictionaries identify only copy editors. Three others list both copyeditors and copy editors. You pays your money and you do what your slot man says.

Before dropping this absorbing inquiry, I am bound to note that the New World Dictionary says the denomination of "copy boy" is now "rare." The editors suggest that the copy boy of my nonage has morphed into a "copy aide." Copy aide? Aaargh! I don't believe it.

Readers are invited to send dated citations of usage to Mr. Kilpatrick. His e-mail address is kilpatjj@aol.com.